voltOhm: liberal socialism at it's finest. Note absolutely complete lack of rational thought.

Pumpernickel bread: Yep, Bush did sign the bill into law and people (lefties) want to demonize him for it, but seem to overlook that Ted Kennedy the uberliberal was a co-sponsor of the bill.

Fair enough, but the prez is ultimately responsible for what he puts his farking signature to.

voltOhm: liberal socialism at it's finest. Note absolutely complete lack of rational thought.

Noted!

WhiteAndNerdy: Hoytgal: NO ONE likes math.

Speak for yourself.

/Yo I know pi to a thousand places

He does vector calculus just for fun too.

It may not be liberal, but public school is a socialist concept. It's even one of the planks of the Communist Manifesto. It seems to be working out about as well as the other planks we've incorporated into our society.

untaken_name: It may not be liberal, but public school is a socialist concept. It's even one of the planks of the Communist Manifesto. It seems to be working out about as well as the other planks we've incorporated into our society.

Public education somehow works fantastically in the nations that treat teachers well and fund it adequately. Huh.

Jackdragna: untaken_name: It may not be liberal, but public school is a socialist concept. It's even one of the planks of the Communist Manifesto. It seems to be working out about as well as the other planks we've incorporated into our society.

Public education somehow works fantastically in the nations that treat teachers well and fund it adequately. Huh.

Which country funds public education more adequately than the US? I doubt there's more than one. We spend about $8k/student/year, on average.

untaken_name: Jackdragna: untaken_name: It may not be liberal, but public school is a socialist concept. It's even one of the planks of the Communist Manifesto. It seems to be working out about as well as the other planks we've incorporated into our society.

Public education somehow works fantastically in the nations that treat teachers well and fund it adequately. Huh.

Which country funds public education more adequately than the US? I doubt there's more than one. We spend about $8k/student/year, on average.

too bad that all goes to building stadiums and making football uniforms :P

Sunidesus: cig-mkr: Sunidesus:

/lives in RI
//one guess which Rep it was

Patrick J. Kennedy
Put RI in my rearview 30 yrs. ago, visit couple time a year just to see what I'm not missing.

We have a winner! Watching raw interviews with that man is beyond painful.

Moved here about seven years ago and am continually amazed at the insanity of the place.

Trying to remember, was it drugs or alcohol for Patrick?
And you haven't seen insanity until you meet my ex, she is still there.

CK2005: untaken_name: Jackdragna: untaken_name: It may not be liberal, but public school is a socialist concept. It's even one of the planks of the Communist Manifesto. It seems to be working out about as well as the other planks we've incorporated into our society.

Public education somehow works fantastically in the nations that treat teachers well and fund it adequately. Huh.

Which country funds public education more adequately than the US? I doubt there's more than one. We spend about $8k/student/year, on average.

too bad that all goes to building stadiums and making football uniforms :P

Yes, but that does highlight that it isn't funding that is the problem, it's the efficient use of resources. That's why calls for "more funding! more funding!" aren't going to fix the problem. However, when the entire nation is made up of public school graduates, school boards can more easily get away with that skullduggery.

untaken_name: Which country funds public education more adequately than the US? I doubt there's more than one. We spend about $8k/student/year, on average.

3, actually. Denmark, Switzerland, and Austria. Source (new window)

However, funding the school well doesn't mean jack when the school administration misappropriates those funds. I'd wager that treating your teachers well (and giving them the ability to control their classrooms) means a bit more than spending per student.

untaken_name: It may not be liberal, but public school is a socialist concept. It's even one of the planks of the Communist Manifesto. It seems to be working out about as well as the other planks we've incorporated into our society.

It's not failing because it's socialist-- and incidentally, you are wrong. The current (last 100 yrs) method of teaching is based upon the highly successful and disciplined Prussian Army and the notion that psychology should be in charge of education and learning- BF Skinner/Watson/et al. It's failing because rote memorization and regurgitation is not the natural way humans learn. We're forcing children to learn analytically, instead of classically (you learn from the company you keep). The entire system needs an overhaul so desperately, and yet I don't think I'll see it in my lifetime. The best I can do is to try to bring classical/natural learning into my classroom while still adhering to the required standards.

I recommend the book "The Book of Learning and Forgetting" by Frank Smith. Very enlightening stuff, if you are interested in education.

And whoever said NCLB is going to be out of the picture is correct- Race to The Top is the new initiative to improve educational methods, for whatever it's going to be worth (besides the $3.4 billion already spent on it). NCLB was designed for public schools to fail so that the government could hand out vouchers to parents so parents could decide what type of school (private, religious, charter, public) to send their children.

NCLB passed 384-45 in the House and 91-8 in the Senate. By party, the majority of yes votes were cast by Democrats (197 Democrats vs. 186 Republicans voting yes in the House; 47 Democrats vs. 43 Republicans voting yes in the Senate). By party, the majority of no votes were cast by Republicans (34 Republicans vs 10 Democrats voting no in the House, one House independent voting no; 7 Republicans vs 1 Democrat voting no in the Senate).

So, both parties were strongly committed to this bipartisan bill co-written and co-sponsored by Ted Kennedy. But the people smart enough to figure out that NCLB was a bad idea before it passed and gutsy enough to defy their party leaders were disproportionately Republicans.

TsukasaK: untaken_name: Which country funds public education more adequately than the US? I doubt there's more than one. We spend about $8k/student/year, on average.

3, actually. Denmark, Switzerland, and Austria. Source (new window)

However, funding the school well doesn't mean jack when the school administration misappropriates those funds. I'd wager that treating your teachers well (and giving them the ability to control their classrooms) means a bit more than spending per student.

Your link only counts primary school, which doesn't have the football stadium/uniform problem mentioned above. While it may be that those three countries continue to spend more even with junior high/high school included in the stats, I doubt it. But my point was basically the second half of your post, so I don't think we're in any conflict here.

If politicians want to solve the education issue in this country, they only have to do 1 thing:

Pay teachers in high-risk and under performing schools more. Use grant money, incentives, use whatever, but make them the highest paid teachers and make those jobs more attractive.

No one wants those jobs. The good jobs are at the schools with the good kids who are already doing the work. Performance based teaching will not work due to this - the only way to fix it is to find a way to pay teachers in poorer\rougher districts more.

AmyZen: untaken_name: It may not be liberal, but public school is a socialist concept. It's even one of the planks of the Communist Manifesto. It seems to be working out about as well as the other planks we've incorporated into our society.

It's not failing because it's socialist-- and incidentally, you are wrong.

1. I never said it was failing because it's socialist
2. Here is the 10th point of progress included in the Communist Manifesto: "#10 Free education for all children in public schools. Abolition of children's factory labour in its present form. Combination of education with industrial production.[9]"

So...I'm what now?

The current (last 100 yrs) method of teaching is based upon the highly successful and disciplined Prussian Army and the notion that psychology should be in charge of education and learning- BF Skinner/Watson/et al. It's failing because rote memorization and regurgitation is not the natural way humans learn. We're forcing children to learn analytically, instead of classically (you learn from the company you keep). The entire system needs an overhaul so desperately, and yet I don't think I'll see it in my lifetime. The best I can do is to try to bring classical/natural learning into my classroom while still adhering to the required standards.

I never addressed the reason for the failure of public school, but nice rant that was completed and totally unrelated to anything I posted.


I recommend the book "The Book of Learning and Forgetting" by Frank Smith. Very enlightening stuff, if you are interested in education.

The only education I'm interested in is my own, which was not provided by public school.

And whoever said NCLB is going to be out of the picture is correct- Race to The Top is the new initiative to improve educational methods, for whatever it's going to be worth (besides the $3.4 billion already spent on it). NCLB was designed for public schools to fail so that the government could hand out vouchers to parents so parents could decide what type of school (private, religious, charter, public) to send their children.

No comment on this because I didn't say anything about NCLB.

I don't mean to be rude, but your reading comprehension and critical thinking skills do not seem to be very well developed. Are you, perchance, a public school teacher?

untaken_name: Your link only counts primary school, which doesn't have the football stadium/uniform problem mentioned above. While it may be that those three countries continue to spend more even with junior high/high school included in the stats, I doubt it. But my point was basically the second half of your post, so I don't think we're in any conflict here.

Whoops, good catch here's the proper link for secondary schools.

Still Switzerland and Austria above us by a grand or so.

What's really interesting/telling is that, looking over the other statistics (% of students who report school as boring or that they hate going, or teacher salary, or any of the other related statistics on that site), there's really no correlation between the spending stat and the other ones.

In this case, it's not about the money, not even a little bit.

@voltohm. Get your head out of your teapot. "No child left behind" is a Bush law. Unless of course you are admitting that Bush was a socialist.

untaken_name: Jackdragna: untaken_name: It may not be liberal, but public school is a socialist concept. It's even one of the planks of the Communist Manifesto. It seems to be working out about as well as the other planks we've incorporated into our society.

Public education somehow works fantastically in the nations that treat teachers well and fund it adequately. Huh.

Which country funds public education more adequately than the US? I doubt there's more than one. We spend about $8k/student/year, on average.

Yes indeed. The problem appears to be that not enough of the money goes to the classrooms and too much of it goes to administrators and their granite countertopped bathrooms and other such related waste.

In addition, tenure has no place in the public school system.

voltOhm: liberal socialism at it's finest. Note absolutely complete lack of rational thought.

note the complete lack of rational thought in your accusation of lack of rational thought.

are you really this stupid?

SharkTrager: DigitalCoffee: LittleBlondeJug: Makh: They just have to show they are getting halfway closer to their goal each time. This way they can improve every year.

Um, that sounds like math.

Math is hard.

OK, we'll let you skip the math this one time. But, as punishment, you have to diagram the headline.

/hated that shiat in middle school
//congressmen should be banned from voting on any bill that they couldn't explain to an average person

A simpler solution is not being allowed to vote on a bill they have not bothered to read.

Except you can never truly determine comprehension. However we know for a fact they are voting for things they haven't read, including bills with their own damn name in the title. They've said as much.

Force them to read everything and the amount of total bullshiat drops dramatically.

Sunidesus: cig-mkr:

Trying to remember, was it drugs or alcohol for Patrick?
And you haven't seen insanity until you meet my ex, she is still there.

I think both. I specifically remember a couple drug stories, I know there's been at least two rehab stints just since I've been here.

The thing that scares me is that he gets re-elected. People know he's not even remotely all there and they still vote for him. I'm sure he'd be being re-elected again this year if he hadn't decided not to run.

Kennedy the name is gold in the NE, anyone in the clan is electable, hell, Ted killed Jo Ann and he still was re-elected.

cig-mkr:And that's why there are pictures on the cash register at Mickey Dee's instead of numbers. Nothing more amusing then offering them the exact change after they rang up your $20 bill.

Had a cashier at the grocery store get all flustered because she rang in $100 instead of $10. She had to call her manager over and ask what to do....

namatad: dahmers love zombie: Regression toward the mean, biatches...do you speak it?

this and more this
when politicians pass laws that are logically impossible, they should automatically be ejected from office and banned from every serving another office again. period.

vote for a law that all schools must be above average?
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA thanks you for playing.

I agree. For years, I have thought that in order to qualify as a candidate for public office, one should be required to pass an intelligence test. As noted above, logic questions should be a central feature of such a test.

SharkTrager: SharkTrager: DigitalCoffee: LittleBlondeJug: Makh: They just have to show they are getting halfway closer to their goal each time. This way they can improve every year.

Um, that sounds like math.

Math is hard.

OK, we'll let you skip the math this one time. But, as punishment, you have to diagram the headline.

/hated that shiat in middle school
//congressmen should be banned from voting on any bill that they couldn't explain to an average person

A simpler solution is not being allowed to vote on a bill they have not bothered to read.

Except you can never truly determine comprehension. However we know for a fact they are voting for things they haven't read, including bills with their own damn name in the title. They've said as much.

Force them to read everything and the amount of total bullshiat drops dramatically.

It's like with Sarah Palin. Which bills have the congresspersons read? "All of them."

The schools do have an "out," they can just not accept federal money; then there would be no strings to be pulled.

A lot of the laws are based on funded mandates. That means if they receive any federal money then a whole host of federal laws and regulations can be imposed, even if they appear unrelated.

LittleBlondeJug: wingedkat: LittleBlondeJug: I WAS TOLD THERE WOULD BE NO MATH!!!

Unfortunately, attitudes like this have led to people supporting the current situation.

You don't have to LIKE math to USE it.

"NO MATH" is what they told me, and here you are telling me that I have to use it, even if I don't like it?

/can I bring a calculator?
//English is more my thing
///virgule virgule virgule

Mmmmmm. Nuttin' like a lil' virgule 'tween two people.

MrBentor: The schools do have an "out," they can just not accept federal money; then there would be no strings to be pulled.

A lot of the laws are based on funded mandates. That means if they receive any federal money then a whole host of federal laws and regulations can be imposed, even if they appear unrelated.

You're missing the point. The goal of education is to spend as much money as possible, and that's not possible without federal money.

fluffy2097: voltOhm: liberal socialism at it's finest. Note absolutely complete lack of rational thought.

Wait. Who passed "no child left behind"? The law that is screwing over the schools?

/I'll wait.

Seeing as how Ted Kennedy was the initial sponsor and it passed 384-45 in the House and 91-8 in the Senate... I'm going to blame it... Cuba?

Both sides passed it farktard.

Holfax: I like my headline better:

By! law schools must improve, every year. Schools that don't, advance from 99% to 100%: proficiency may be abolished and students sent to better schools. that jumped from 50% (to 55%, as required).

But you have to read it as William Shatner doing Zap Brannigan doing Captain Kirk.

TheShavingofOccam123: Something tells me your leaving something out of your story..

Anyways, the law only applies to schools receiving Title 1 money.
The "point" is, that if your school is performing so well, you shouldn't need Title 1 money, and you shouldn't be applying for it. But the funds are addictive.

kukukupo: If politicians want to solve the education issue in this country, they only have to do 1 thing:

Pay teachers in high-risk and under performing schools more. Use grant money, incentives, use whatever, but make them the highest paid teachers and make those jobs more attractive.

No one wants those jobs. The good jobs are at the schools with the good kids who are already doing the work. Performance based teaching will not work due to this - the only way to fix it is to find a way to pay teachers in poorer\rougher districts more.

Sorry, that won't work either. The #1 reason our schools are failing is because of parents. Parents who care and make education a priority have kids who do well in school. The parents who don't care about education (or their kids) have kids who don't do well.

If you're wanting to throw money around, then pay parents for having their children get good grades and/or passing the tests. If the parents have a financial incentive you better believe that they'll make sure their kids take school seriously.

Gunny Walker:
voltOhm: liberal socialism at it's finest. Note absolutely complete lack of rational thought.

That's what we get for electing a liberal like George Bush. When will we learn to vote Republican?

(Are you serious? You do know he was the one who signed it, right?)

Not only that it was signed after passing through Republican controlled committees, a Republican congress and a Republican senate. For the love of all that is, John Boehner was the man who introduced it with co-sponsors from a vast majority of influential Republican congressmen, who almost everyone of them voted for it. All but 6 Republican senators voted for it and to reauthorize it too.

So we can only come to the conclusion that the Republican party is almost to the person a liberal socialist disaster out to destroy America.

SDRR:

In addition, tenure has no place in the public school system.

Why? Unlike what anti-union people like to say, tenure does not prevent a bad teacher from being fired. It just makes sure there is a proper process to be followed before that happens. You need to build a case against the teacher, with specific incidents with specific dates, and then create a plan of action for the teacher to improve. If it still doesn't happen, then the teacher could be fired.

The union will still try to get the teacher more help and another chance, but if the administrator has went about things properly, they won't be able to save their job.

Most administrators don't want to be bothered with the work (or just don't have time because they're overworked as much as the teachers) so they just kind of let it go.

Yugoboy: Race to the Top is/was the federal government trying to force local/state schools to conform to some model dreamed up by Arni Duncan and Barack Obama - two people who haven't taught in a school in forever, if ever.

Wasn't Obama a Law Professor? ... awkward...

Let's just stop throwing money away, eh?

My high school gym teacher pulled down over *six figures* in a suburban town where the median household income was half of what he earned.

But half our kids are retarded. So....we need more money! Don't you care about the children, don't you care about the future? We need more money.

I mean, let's face it - it's not like 10th grade Algebra has remained static over the past 30 years. We really, really need new books every year to address the complex new modifications to basic algebra. And, come'on - children can't understand a formula that is hand-written on the board, or even on simple over-head projectors based on a simple light mirror.....we need $3,000 high-res digital scanners linked to the teacher's workstation (that she struggles to log into each day).

Meanwhile, the Principal thinks that changes the monitor's resolution is a security risk because it allows students to see 'hidden' parts of the screen.

But yeah - we'd better give them more funding. That's the problem.

limeyfellow: Not only that it was signed after passing through Republican controlled committees, a Republican congress and a Republican senate.

No, it was a Democratic Senate. Jim Jeffords quit the Republicans May 21st, control of the Senate switched June 6th, NCLB passed the Senate June 14th.

bill3rd: If you're wanting to throw money around, then pay parents for having their children get good grades and/or passing the tests. If the parents have a financial incentive you better believe that they'll make sure their kids take school seriously.

OTOH, enough parents are already up teachers' asses for no good goddamn reason, and that's just the psychotic and/or delusional ones; tie money to it and yes you'll get more parents who work with their kids and teachers to improve scores, but you'll also dramatically increase the crazy, and believe me, there are plenty of parents who are batshiat insane but don't happen to have decided to focus their wack-nuttery on the schools, but they would if money were on the line.

The number of groundless complaints of all sorts leveled against teachers and the amount of abuse they'd have to take in parent-teacher meetings and phone calls would almost certainly go up a lot. Teaching is already political within the school (unfortunately), but adding financial incentives would make teachers political figures outside the school, too.

voltOhm: liberal socialism at it's finest. Note absolutely complete lack of rational thought.

Always knew that damn Bush was a Commie.

voltOhm: liberal socialism at it's finest.

It's political power at it's finest.

Note absolutely complete lack of rational thought.

It's entirely rational for a very different goal than one we have been told.